transcript
SITZUNGSBERICHTE, 849. BAND
VERÖFFENTLICHUNGEN ZUR IRANISTIK HERAUSGEGEBEN VON BERT G. FRAGNER
UND VELIZAR SADOVSKI
NR. 60
TOSHIFUMI GOT
in co-operation with Jared S. Klein and Velizar Sadovski
Vorgelegt von w. M. BERT G. FRAGNER
in der Sitzung am 1. Oktober 2010
Alle Rechte vorbehalten
Wien
Printed and bound in the EU
http://hw.oeaw.ac.at/6948-2 http://verlag.oeaw.ac.at
Diese Publikation wurde einem anonymen, internationalen peer-review
Verfahren unterzogen.
This publication had been anonymously reviewed by international
peers.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication data
Old Indo-Aryan morphology and its Indo-Iranian background
Toshifumi Got
Dem Andenken
MANFRED MAYRHOFERS 26.9.1926 – 31.10.2011
Recently I had occasion to write a short contribution on the
morphology of Old Indo- Aryan for a handbook of historical
linguistics. I soon recognized, however, that we lack an up-to-date
summary on the subject, so I expanded my manuscript. My colleague
Velizar Sadovski examined my rough draft on my visit to Vienna in
September 2009 and sug- gested to me that I should write a booklet
including more thorough-going references to the preceding
Indo-Iranian stage. The present monograph is the result. It is
admittedly only a sketch, which is to be revised and enlarged with
corrections and completions, especially with regard to recent
researches in this field. I hope it serves nevertheless as a basis
for future studies. I have put in this work many items of material
and method I have learned from my teacher Karl Hoffmann, to whom I
express my deepest respect, in Erlangen between 1977 and 1985, in
those good days. This book is thus an “Erlangen program” of the
eighties summarised from my perspective. Writing these lines, I
remember Hoffmann’s words that one should have the courage to fail
in order to bring advances to our discipline. My teacher seems to
have had for himself too little courage, but I venture it. I owe my
schol- arly training in Erlangen also to Gert Klingenschmitt and
other colleagues. I express my sincere thanks to them. We have
today a fundamental grammar of Avestan, which describes, so to
speak, (Proto-)Indo-Iranian from the Avestan side: Avestische Laut-
und Flexionslehre by Karl HOFFMANN and Bernhard FORSSMAN, Innsbruck
1996, 22004. So, I may begin with Old Indo-Aryan. Indo-European
comparative grammar is important not only for philology and
linguistics, but it is of fundamental importance for understanding
human history as a whole and our position today in the “global”
world. I try to trace word forms back to Proto-Indo-Iranian
2
and to Proto-Indo-European. Many books have accompanied my work:
among others, Manfred MAYRHOFER, Etymologisches Wörterbuch des
Altindoarischen, I–III, Heidel- berg 1992–2001, and Helmut RIX,
Historische Grammatik des Griechischen. Laut- und Formenlehre,
Darmstadt 1976. I feel proud in going forward together with
them.
May this booklet be of benefit for Vedic and Sanskrit philologists,
Iranists, scholars of Indo-European studies, and those who are
interested in language. I am indebted to Velizar Sadovski for his
valuable advice and friendship. I should like to record my sincere
thanks to Professor Dr. Manfred Mayrhofer, who also helped me with
my first publication in the Austrian Academy of Sciences. Taking
this occasion I extend my thanks to the following Professors and
Doctors for their help and encouragement: above all, to my teacher
Johanna Narten and Erlangen seniors Heiner Eichner, Bernhard
Forssman, Rosemarie Lühr, Norbert Oettinger, Eva Tichy, and Michael
Witzel, as well as to my colleagues and friends, Rahul Peter Das,
George Dunkel, Harry Falk, José Luis García Ramón, Jost Gippert,
Olav Hackstein, Jón Axel Hararson, Heinrich Hettrich, Jean Kellens,
Jared S. Klein, Thomas Krisch, Leonid Kulikov, Martin Joachim
Kümmel, Beda Künzle, Reiner Lipp, Alexander M. Lubotsky, Michael
Meier-Brügger, Gerhard Meiser, Thomas Oberlies, Georges-Jean
Pinault, Eric Pirart, Salvatore Scarlata, Christiane Schaefer,
Rüdiger Schmitt, Günter Schweiger, Xavier Tremblay, Chlodwig H.
Werba, Albrecht Wezler, Sabine Ziegler, the late Jochem Schindler
and Ronald E. Emmerick, as well as my best colleague, Junko
Sakamoto-Got, and many other persons whom I may have only
accidentally forgotten to name. I am much obliged also to our
younger colleagues and students. Dr. Naoko Nishimura (Sendai) read
my manuscript through and compiled indices with the assistance of
Mr. Tomoki Yamada (M.A., Sendai). Mr. Jonathan Morris (M.A., Sen-
dai) and Prof. Dr. James Tink (Thoku University, Sendai) kindly
read and corrected my English. Prof. Dr. Toshiya Tanaka (Kysh
University, Fukuoka) gave me important sug- gestions for
improvement of the English. Mr. Takaaki Araiwa (Leipzig) helped me
with information about Slavic languages. I am much obliged to them
for their assistance.
Sendai, June 2010
My respected colleagues Jared Stephen Klein (University of Georgia
at Athens), Velizar Sadovski (Austrian Academy of Sciences),
Rüdiger Schmitt (Laboe), and Jost Gippert (Frankfurt a. M.) read my
book manuscript through and corrected not only my poor English but
also many shortcomings in the scholarly contents. For their kindly
efforts, which saved my honour in many points, I express my sincere
thanks. Drs. Sunao Kasamatsu and Junichi Ozono (Sendai) were kind
enough to help me with the last revision of the indices.
Morioka/Vienna, December 2012
The work on this book was supported by the Japan Society for the
Promotion of Science, Grant-in-Aid for
Scientific Research (B), No. 19320009, 2007–2010.
Table of contents
0. general remarks 0.1. “dynamic” scheme of the inflexional
paradigms …………………… 1. nouns
1.1. nominal inflexion ………………………………………………… 1.1.1. the endings (or
terminations) of the thematic -a- stems …………… 1.1.2. the endings of
athematic inflexions ……………………………… 1.1.3. notes on the locative
singular ……………………………………
1.2. stem formations and ablaut …………………………………
1.2.1. root nouns, elemental vocabulary items, and some other
monosyllabic stems ………………………………………… 1.2.1.1. root nouns ending in -
………………………………………
1.2.2. -- suffix stems ………………………………………………… 1.2.3. -- stem
inflexions ………………………………………………… 1.2.4. -- stem inflexions
………………………………………………… 1.2.5. -i- and -u- stem inflexions 1.2.5.1. -i-
stem inflexions ………………………………………………… 1.2.5.2. -u- stem inflexions ……
. .………………………………………… 1.2.5.3. ray-, ví-, ávi-, ar-, páti-, sákhy-,
Av. kauuaii- ……………………… 1.2.5.4. dru, jnu, snu-, Av. iiu-, krátu-
………………………………
1.2.6. stems in -tar-/-tr-/-t-, -ar-/-r-/--; nápt-, nár-, stár-
……………… 1.2.7. neuter heteroclitics in -ar-/-r-/-- and -an-/-n-
…………………… 1.2.7.1. páru-, párva-, dhánu-, dhánvan-, uár- …………………………
1.2.8. suppletive inflexions for nouns of body-parts with -i- and
-an-/-n-; ras-, y-, s-, hárd-/hd- … . .……………………………………
1.2.9. -as- stems; ms-, púms-, msá- ………………………………… 1.2.9.1. accent
distribution, ápas- :: apás-, bráhma- :: brahmá- …………… 1.2.9.2. -i-
stems ….. ………………………………………………… 1.2.9.3. -u- stems . …..
…………………………………………………
1.2.10. -n- stems: [1] hysterodynamic *-én- type, [2] amphidynamic
(and proterodynamic) *-on- type, [3] yúvan-, kany- ………………… 1.2.11.
-n- stems …………………………………………………………… 1.2.12. pánth-/path-/path-
………………………………………………… 1.2.13. stems in -áñc-/-ác-/-()c-
……………………………………………
7
4
1.2.14. [1] active participles with -ánt-/-nt-/-at-, [2] in
thematic inflexions, [3] in acrodynamic and reduplicated
inflexions; –– bhánt-, mahnt-, dánt-, járant- …………………………………………………
1.2.15. -vant-/-vat- and -mant-/-mat- stems ……………………………… 1.2.16.
-vs-/-ú- stems …………………………………………………
1.3. comparatives and superlatives 1.3.1. -tara-, -tama-; -ra-,
-ma- ………………………………………… 1.3.2. -()ys-/-()yas-, -iha-
………………………………………….
1.4.1. motion suffixes: [1] --, [2] --; -n- ……..……………………… 1.4.2. --
:: -ú-, -y- :: -yú-; -ká-, -ik- …………………………………… 1.4.3. old
vddhi-formations ………………………………………… 1.4.4. CALAND forms
………………………………………………… 1.4.5. formant -t- …….. …………………………………………………
1.5. nominal composition: [1] copulative, [2] endocentric, [2a]
appositional compounds, [2b] determinative compounds, [3]
exocentric, [4] other groups ………………………………………………… 2.1.
numerals
2.1.1. cardinals ………………………………………………………… 2.1.2. ordinals
………………………………………………………… 2.1.3. fractions ……… ..…………………………………………………
2.1.4. other numeral adjectives and adverbs ……………………………… 2.2.
pronouns
2.2.1. personal pronouns ………………………………………………… 2.2.2. demonstrative
pronouns …………………………………………… 2.2.3. interrogative and indefinite
pronouns ……………………………… 2.2.4. relative pronouns ………………………………………………….
2.2.5. possessive pronouns or adjectives ………………………………… 2.2.6.
reflexive expressions …………………………………………… 2.2.7. adjectives with
pronominal forms …………………………………… 3. verbs
3.1. general remarks 3.1.1. diathesis (active and middle)
……………………………………… 3.1.2. Aktionsart, Verhaltensart, and Rektionsart
……………………… 3.1.3. aspects, suppletion …………………………………………………
45 47 47
55
79 81 81
table of contents
3.1.4. aspect stems; present stem formations ………………………………
3.2. endings 3.2.1. active endings ….……………………………………………… 3.2.2.
middle endings …………………………………………………… 3.2.3. PII endings
……………………………………………………… 3.2.4. PIE endings
………………………………………………………
3.3. moods 3.3.1. indicative of present and aorist; imperfect;
injunctive ……………… 3.3.2. subjunctive ….…………………………………………………… 3.3.3.
optative, precative …………………………………………………… 3.3.4. imperative
………………………………………………………
3.4. present system 3.4.1. thematic present stems: [Th. 1]–[Th.7]
….…………………………… 3.4.2. athematic stems 3.4.2.1. athematic root stems
[Ath. 1] ……………………………………… 3.4.2.2. “stative” forms [Ath. 1.1.]
………………………………………… 3.4.2.3. acrodynamic root-present [Ath. 2]
………………………………… 3.4.2.4. reduplicated stems [Ath. 3]
………………………………………... 3.4.2.5. nasal presents [Ath. 4.1]–[Ath. 4.3]
…………………………………
3.5. aorist system 3.5.1. athematic root-aorists
..…………………………………………. 3.5.2. thematic root-aorists ………………………………………………
3.5.3. reduplicated aorists ……………………………………………… 3.5.4. sigmatic
aorists: [1] -s-, [2] -i-, [3] -si-, [4] -sa- aor. ……………… 3.5.5.
medio-passive aorist forms ………………………………………
3.6. perfect system 3.6.1. stem and ending ………………………………………………
3.6.2. moods (subjunctive, optative, imperative) of the perfect
…………… 3.6.3. preterite of the perfect, injunctive perfect
.………………………… 3.6.4. participles ….……………………………………………… 3.6.5.
periphrastic perfects ……………………………………………
3.7. secondary present systems 3.7.1. future ……………………………………………………
3.7.1.1. future II ………………………………………………… 3.7.2. desiderative
……………………………………………… 3.7.3. intensive ………………………………………………… 3.7.4.
causative …………………………………………………
83
table of contents
3.7.5. passive ………………………………………………… 3.7.6. denominative
………………………………………………
3.8. nominal and other formations from the verb 3.8.1. infinitives:
[1] -dhyai, [2] -e, -ai, [3] -tave, -tavai, [4] -táye, [4.1] -tyái,
[5] -aye, [6] -ase, -se, [7] -mane, [8] -vane; [9] -as, [10] -tos;
[11] -am, [12] -tum; [13] -sáni ….……………………………………… 3.8.2.
participles in -ánt-/-nt-/-at-; -mna-, -ná-/-na- ……………… 3.8.3.
verbal adjectives in -tá-, -ná- ; -tá-vant- ………………………… 3.8.4.
gerundives: [1] -ya-, [2] -yya-, [3] -en ya-, -enya-, [4] -tva-,
[5] -tavyà- (-tavya-), [6] -aya- ……………………………… 3.8.5. gerunds
(absolutives): [1] -tv, [2] -tvya, [3] -tv , [4] -y, [5] -am
……
3.9. preverbs ……………………………………………………
4. adverbs and indeclinables 4.1. adnominal prepositions
………………………………………… 4.2. adverbial suffixes: [1]–[12] ….
……………………………………… 4.3. adverbial case forms …………………………………………… 4.4.
particles …………………………………………………… 4.5. adverbial constructions
…………………………………………… 4.6. interjections ……………………………………………………
bibliography …….………………………………………………… abbreviations
………………………………………………………… symbols …………………………………………………………… on sandhi
and ruki …..…………………………………………… on laryngeals; se, ani
……………………………………………… indices: subjects and grammatical elements
…………………………………. words and forms …………………………………………………………….. passages
……………………………………………………………
129 130
153 170 171 171 172
173 181 220
table of contents
0. The morphological elements of Old Indo-Aryan (language of riyas)
[OIA] nouns, pronouns, and verbs are to a large extent inherited
from Proto-Indo-Euro- pean [PIE] through Proto-Indo-Iranian
(Proto-Aryan) [PII], and agree with those of Old Iranian (Avestan
[Av.] and Old Persian [OPers.]) very well. The oldest forms are
represented in the language of the gveda [RV] (ca. 1200 B.C.), then
the Atharvaveda [AV] and other Vedic mantras (ca. 1000 B.C.–),
mostly in verse. The prose occurs in the “brhmaa”s of the
Yajurveda-Sahits (ca. 800 B.C.–), in the Brhmaas (7th c. B.C.–),
and the oldest Upaniads (6th–5th c. B.C.). The language of these
Vedic texts is called “Vedic”, and is handed down for the most part
in accented form. The succeeding development of OIA, to which the
gram- mar of Pini (ca. 380 B.C.) was applicable as the standard, is
“Classical San- skrit”. “Epic Sanskrit”, a somewhat more popular
form, is used in the Mahbh- rata and Rmyaa. Vedic, especially the
language of the RV, is the major focus for reconstructing PII and
for comparative and historical IE linguistics in general.
General references: MACDONELL Vedic Grammar (1910);
WACKERNAGEL–DEBRUN- NER Altindische Grammatik [AiG] I–III
(1896–1954); WHITNEY A Sanskrit Grammar (21889); RENOU Grammaire
sanscrite (1930, 21961). –– HOFFMANN–FORSSMAN Avesti- sche Laut-
und Flexionslehre (1996); RIX Historische Grammatik des
Griechischen (1976). –– HOFFMANN Aufsätze zur Indoiranistik I–III
(1975, 1976, 1992); NARTEN Kleine Schriften I (1995). ––
BÖHTLINGK–ROTH Sanskrit-Wörterbuch [PW] (1855–1875); VISHVA BANDHU
STR A Vedic Word-Concordance [VWC] (1942–1976); GRASSMANN
Wörterbuch zum Rig-Veda (1872–1885); MAYRHOFER Etymologisches
Wörterbuch des Altindoarischen [EWAia] I–III
([1986/]1992–2001).
0.1. We begin by introducing some terminology regarding the ablaut
scheme in a paradigm.1) The term “dynamic” refers to a pattern in
which the syllable having an accented *-e-vocalism appears (in ;
other elements show an unaccented zero grade or *-o- grade). The
dynamic scheme starts from the standard that a
1) Cf. PEDERSEN La cinquième déclinaison latine (København 1926);
KURYOWICZ
Études indoeuropéennes (Kraków 1935) 131ff.; KUIPER Notes on Vedic
Noun-Inflexion (Amsterdam 1942); EICHNER MSS 31 (1973) 91, Sprache
20 (1974) 26ff. (bibliography in 27 n.1); SCHINDLER Sprache 13
(1967) 191ff., 15 (1969) 144ff., 19 (1973) 148–157, KZ 81 (1967)
290ff., BSL 67 (1972) 31–38, 70 (1975) 1–10, Flexion und
Wortbildung (1975) 259ff.; NARTEN Fs.Kuiper (1968) 9–19 = Kl.Schr.
97–107; BEEKES KZ 86 (1972) 30–63, KZ 87 (1973) 86–98; HOFFMANN
Aufs. II (1976) 597ff., KLINGENSCHMITT KZ 92 (1978) 1–13 = Aufs.
159–169 (“prototon”), Altarm.Verbum (1982) 289 (“rhizoton”); RIX
MSS 18 (1965) 79–92, Hist.Gramm. 123; STRUNK Grammatische
Kategorien (VII. Fach- tagung), 1985, 490–514; SZEMERÉNYI
Einführung in die vergleichende Sprachwissen- schaft3 (Darmstadt
1989) 170f.
8
word consists of three syllabic elements A-B-C, which correspond in
most cases to root-suffix-ending. A formation without suffix
(root-ending), as in the root nouns, inj. of the athemat. root
pres. or aor., is regarded as B-C, observed from the end. The
“strong form” in a paradigm (e.g., nom. sg. in nouns) has *-é- in A
or B; the “weak form” (e.g., an oblique case) in A, B, or C; the
place of *-é- in a weak form does not go back beyond that of the
strong form:2)
acrodynamic: in strong forms A-B-C, in weak forms A-B-C
proterodynamic: A-B-C, A-B-C amphidynamic: A-B-C, A-B-C ,
hysterodynamic: A-B-C, A-B-C .
The reconstructed endings, however, do not have a complete variety
of ablaut grades, but some endings can only be reconstructed with a
full-grade (e.g., dat. sg. *-e, nom. pl. *-es), or zero-grade form
(e.g., acc. pl. *-s, *-ns). 1. nouns
Like PIE and other old languages, OIA distinguishes three genders:
mascu- line [m.], feminine [f.], and neuter [n.]. Nouns consist of
substantives [subst.] and adjectives [adj.]. The adj.s are
declinable in three genders. Words designating male and female
beings are m. and f. respectively. There are some motion suf- fixes
inherited from PIE, e.g., -- < *-é-h2-, -y-/-- <
*-éh2-/-ih2-, cf. also -h2- in -u-h2- (1.4.1.). Inanimate objects
and concepts are m., f., or n., largely depending on their
word-formation, i.e. the suffix. Words for trees are m. (: vká- m.
‘tree’), herbs are f. (: óadhi- f.), and fruits n. (: phála- n.).
Animals are represented either by a m. (ván- ‘dog’ < *én- :: un-
‘she-dog’, hasá- ‘goose, gander’) or a f. (gáv- ‘cow’ and ‘cattle’
< *gwó-, there are many terms for each kind of cattle ac-
cording to gender, age, and use). OIA has three numbers: singular
[sg.], dual [du.], and plural [pl.]. The du. is used to refer to
two persons or objects in general, not restricted to forming a
pair. Eight cases are used: nominative [nom.] for the subject,
vocative [voc.] for addressing a person (or thing), accusative
[acc.] for the direct object, dative [dat.] for the indirect object
or aim, genitive [gen.] to indicate possession or part,
instrumental [instr.] for means or association, ablative [abl.] to
indicate separation, and locative [loc.] to indicate
location.
1.1. The basis of the nominal inflexion (declension)3) is the
nominal stem, which carries the lexical meaning, and is in most
cases with substantive nouns bound to one of the genders, at least
originally. Every inflected form terminates 2) Concerning the
accent place, one can speak of acro-static, protero-kinetic, etc.
3) Cf. LANMAN JAOS 10 (1872–1880) 325–601, AiG III (1930).
1. nouns
9
with an ending (“case ending”), which indicates number, case, and
in part, gender. Nominal paradigms belong to one of two
inflectional types: thematic and athematic, depending on whether or
not a vowel -a- (PIE *-e/o-) precedes the endings. The former type
secondarily spreads to some forms, especially in “vowel stems”.
Neuter nouns are inflected like masculines except that they have
different endings in the nom. = acc. for all three numbers.
1.1.1. The endings (or terminations, Ausgänge, i.e. the ending
fused together with the final part of the stem) of the thematic -a-
stems are:4)
In the singular, nom., m. as < PII *-as < PIE *-o-s, voc. a
< *-a < *-e (i.e. *-e + Ø) acc. am < *-am < *-o-m, nom.
acc. n. am < *-am < *-o-m, instr. < *- < *-e-h1, but
usually replaced by pronominal ena4a) < *-an (cf. 2.2.2. [4]:
p.71),4b) dat. ya < *a (remodelled in PII after gen. *-asa, cf.
WACKERNAGEL
Kl.Schr. 274f.; OAv. -i., -ii beside OAv. YAv. i < PII *-i <
PIE *-o-e), abl. t5) < *-t, *-aat6) < *-o-at/d7), *-o-h2et/d,
or *-o-et/d(?), gen. asya < *-asa < *-o-so (beside *-o-so,
not continued in Indo-Iran.) , loc. e < *-a8) < *-o-;
4) Some elements in the thematic inflexion are common to those in
the pronominal inflexion. 4a) Also -en, cf. LANMAN 332, MACDONELL
256f., AiG III 92. 4b) Only the forms in -a < *- occur in OIran.
On relics in - in OIA (espec. in the n.; only uncertain examples
are found in the prose; forms in - appear in older layers in Pli
beside -ena), cf. LANMAN 331ff. (espec. 334f.), MACDONELL 257. Cf.
AiG III 90–92. 5) Disyllabic -at (-aat) probably in parkat RV I
30,21, VIII 5,31, X 22,6, antárikat X 158,1, sadásthat VIII 11,7;
according to LANMAN 337f., however, “extremely doubtful”. 6) Av. t,
OPers. (< *-t), unified with postposition - in YAv. xšaθrδa
beside xšaθ- rt ‘from the dominion’; with -c: at-c < *aát-ca in
OAv. aat-c, YAv. yasnat-c ‘from the worship’, furthermore, OAv.
at-hac ‘on the basis of law’, and with shortening in the third-last
syllable YAv. nmnat-hac ‘from house’, cf. HOFFMANN–FORSSMAN 119. 7)
Cf. STANG Vergleichende Grammatik der Baltischen Sprachen (1966)
128, DUNKEL
Rekonstruktion und relative Chronologie, Akten Leiden (1992) 175
with n.91. 8) OAv. i, e, a-c, YAv. e, a-ca, OPers. aiy; unified
with postposition -: OAv. xšaθri., akii ‘in bad…’, YAv.
Vourukaaiia, zastaiia, OPers. dastay (cf. Ved. hásta ‘on the
hand’), cf. HOFFMANN–FORSSMAN 119.
1.1. nominal inflexion; 1.1.1. thematic terminations
10
in the dual, nom. voc. acc. m. 9) < PII *- < PIE *-o-h1, au
< *- + * (only in OIA), nom. acc. n. e < *-a10) < *-o-ih1,
instr. dat. abl. bhym instead of *ebhy < PII *-abh11), +
*-m/-am,12) gen. loc. ayos: a blend of PII gen. *-as13) <
*-o-h1s and loc. *-aa14) < *-o-h1o15);
in the plural, nom. voc. m. s < *-o-es16), acc. n17) (with long
introduced from the nom. s; PII *-ans18) < PIE *-o-ns <
Pre-PIE **-o-m-s), nom. acc. n. , ni19) < PIE *- < *-e-h2
(collective), 9) Also -a in the voc., especially in nouns referring
to Mitra and Varua, cf. AiG III 53. [Cf. KUIPER Shortening (1955).]
10) OAv. i, YAv. e. The form *-aH is postulated in the OIA
“praghya”-sandhi of -e (FORSSMAN MSS 25, 1969, 49 n.11), cf. also
n.27. 11) OAv. ibii, YAv. a ibiia, OPers. aibiy preserve the old
formation *-o-bh-. In OIA, - in the nom. voc. acc. is assumed to be
introduced in place of -a-, thus also YAv. forms in biia (HOFFMANN
Aufs. 55 n.7). 12) One assumes generally bhiym in the case of a few
trisyllabic forms (cf. LANMAN
343f.), but bhyam (i.e. bhyaam) is equally possible. It seems that
no trisyllabic form is found in athematic inflexions. A PIE form
can be reconstructed without complete certainty: *-o-bhi-m or
*-o-bh-eh1 (?), cf. RIX Hist.Gramm.141. 13) OAv. saii ‘of both
parties’, YAv. vraii ‘of both men’, and numeral duuaii ‘of two’,
uuaii ‘of both’ (HOFFMANN–FORSSMAN 120). 14) OAv. zastaii ‘in both
hands’, ubii, YAv. +uuaii ‘in both’ (loc. cit.). 15) About gen. and
loc. du. in PIE cf. HOFFMANN Aufs. 561 n.2, 599 n.14,
LINDEMAN
NTS 26 (1972) 231, Triple representation (1982) 31 n.23, LÜHR MSS
35 (1977) 84 n.3. 16) Collective < *-e-h2 was generalised in the
thematic inflexion in Iranian as in Pli. Ved., OAv., YAv., and Pli
have also hyper-marked forms in sas (< *s-as) beside s or . Such
forms occur also in the -- stems (p.21), and in pánthsas ‘ways’ (p.
44)[; also aniyha bagha ‘the other gods’ in OPers., cf. KENT §10,
§172, SCHMITT Fs.Eilers 265ff.] 17) And *ns in the sandhi-form ca.
Cf. n.31. 18) In OAv. g, s-c, YAv. s, s-ca (and variant forms ,
s-ca) < *-ans (cf. HOFFMANN–FORSSMAN 66:§35hc, 88:§54d). OPers.
seems to go back to *ns as in OIA, judging from the fact that the
final -a caused by the loss of a consonant (t, n, h) preserves its
quantity (HOFFMANN Aufs. 634). 19) Later (Vedic prose +) only ni
which is formed probably after -n- stems, e.g. nm :: nmni ‘names’
(cf. p. 41). No form with short -a is reported. In Iranian only -
(in YAv. regularly to -a, in OPers. only yadan).
1. nouns
11
instr. ais < *-š < *-s20), dat. abl. ebhyas < *-a-bhas21),
gen. nm (also naam/naam/) < *-nm/-naam22) < *-o-om, loc. eu
< *-ašu23) < *-osu.
Many nouns have this thematic inflexion, e.g., devá- ‘heavenly;
god’: devás, deva, devám, devéna (also devén, dev), devt, devya,
devásya, devé; dev or deváu, devbhym, deváyos; devs (also devsas),
devs (also devsas), devn, deváis (also devébhis), devébhyas, devnm,
devéu.
1.1.2. Other inflexions are characterised by the same set of
endings:
In the singular, nom., m. f. -s < PII, PIE *-s, or -Ø (in the
case of long-grade stems), voc. -Ø, acc. m. f. -m, -am < *-m,
*-, nom. acc. n. -Ø, instr.24) -, or lengthening of preceding vowel
< *-, *-H < *-eh1, *-h1,
20) In the RV and other mantra text portions also ebhis (cf., e.g.
--bhis in f. -- stem) as in the pronom. inflexion, e.g. tébhis (RV
and other mantras) beside táis (AV+, however, cf. OAv. tiš, Grk.
τος < *ts). Cf. also Pli ehi. 21) Probably PIE *-o-mo-s crossed
with instr. *-o-bhi(-s). 22) OPers. nm, but OAv. YAv. anm with
short a before nm (also in the -- in- flexion; for the explanation
cf. HOFFMANN–FORSSMAN 60:§26bd. There are two excep- tions YAv.
maiinm ‘of men, people’ and γnnm (γn-/gan- ‘woman’); the former
could be interpreted as avoiding three short syllables
(SAUSSURE–WACKERNAGEL’s law, cf. AiG I, Nachtr. 177 on 313,42) from
*mártiyanaam (the final m is scanned almost con- sistently
disyllabically, thus < *-anaam), but there are also
contra-examples. The termina- tion in PIE is *-m < *-o-om (cf.
n.36). In Indo-Iranian, the formant -nm is introduced in the “vowel
stems” as nm: YAv. gairinm = Ved. girm ‘of mountains’, OAv. vohunm
= Ved. vásnm ‘of good…’, YAv. tanunm = Ved. tannm ‘of bodies’,
--nm, ytu-j- nm ‘of the ones urged by sorcery’ beside jóguv-m ‘of
the ones who are jubilating’, etc. The disyllabic -naam is known a
few times in -- stems, and more than ten times in -i- stems
(MACDONELL 267, 287). The precise process of this development is
unknown, cf. n. 36. The alleged Vedic forms with m (such as devm;
candidates in ib. 262) are all uncertain. 23) OAv. -aš, YAv. -ašu,
and unified with postposition -: YAv. raoδašuua, OPers. Mdaišuv.
24) Indo-Iranian has generalised the ending *-eh1 (originally in
the amphi- or hysterody- namic type). The ending *-h1, which must
have been generated as an ablaut variant in the acro- and
proterodynamic types, is preserved in Vedic -i- stems (t, cítt,
ácitt, etc., and with -i, originally from a pre-vocalic position
with loss of h1, e.g. suvktí ‘through good praising’, cf. LANMAN
380f., MACDONELL 281), and Avestan -i- and -u- stems (cf. n.75,
n.79): OAv.
1.1.1. thematic terminations; 1.1.2. athematic endings
12
dat.25) -e < *-a < *-e, abl.26) gen. -as, -s < *-as, *-s
< *-és, *-os, *-s, loc. (→ 1.1.3.) -i, -Ø < *-i, *-Ø <
*-i, *-Ø;
in the dual, nom. voc. acc. m. f.27) -, -au (- + ), or lengthening
of preceding vowel < *-, *-H < (*-eh1), *-h1, nom. acc. n. -
< *-28) < *-ih1, instr. dat. abl. -bhym < *-bh + *-m/-am
(cf. n. 12), gen. loc. -os: a blend of PII gen. *-s < *-h1s and
loc. *-a < *-h1o29);
a, ‘by reward’, cist ‘by consciousness’, xrat ‘by mental power’,
maii ‘by mind, spir- it’, voh ‘(by) good’, YAv. axti-ca ‘by pain’,
zatu ‘by tribe’, vohu; cf. HOFFMANN Aufs. 597ff. 25) In the
language of the theologists, the dat.-form with ái appears as gen.
and abl. in the f. -- stem (-yai), and influenced by it, in --
(-yai), -i- (-yai, especially -tyai from the -ti- stem), -u- stem
(-tvai, dhenvái), and in the pron. tásyai, etásyai. This phenomenon
has spread to AV, YSm, and especially to YSp, Br. and Stras. TSp
shows, according to KEITH
TS p.cxlv–cxlvii, only yai forms in --, -i- and -- stems instead of
ys or es (TSp has only -yai in the final dat. of the -i- stem). MSp
has, on the contrary, no such forms accord- ing to WITZEL.
CALAND–RAGHU VIRA BK, introd. 65 write “this genitive-ablative-like
dative … is never found in the seven Kva books”, while it is the
norm in the B-Mdh- yandina. Cf. AiG III 39–41, 135, 150, 505; for
details and explanation, cf. WITZEL “Trac- ing the Vedic dialects”
(1989) 132–139 with notes. Cf. n.57, n.67, n.78, n.84, n.172. 26)
In YAv. -t of -t in the thematic inflexion has spread over all
stems: -at instead of OAv. - < *-ah, -it instead of OAv. -iš*
< *-aš, -aot instead of OAv. -aoš/-uš < *-aš, -aiit instead
of OAv. -aii* < *-h, -n < *-nt instead of OAv. -g < *-ah
< *-ans (HOFF- MANN–FORSSMAN 116). The same process is assumed
for OPers. Bbirauv (*-au < *-a < *-a-t) besides Bbirauš, and
Hindauv (SCHMITT Altpersisch 72). Unified with postposi- tion in
YAv. zraiiahaδa (-ah- stem) ‘from a lake’, xštaδa (-i- stem)
‘because of peace’. 27) In the derivative -- stem (f.), the
nom.-acc.-voc. in the dual has been clarified to PII *-a, with the
neuter ending (< PIE *-eh2-ih1) or after the pronominal form
*t-á (< *tó-ih1
or *teh2-ih1?, cf. n.170): OIA -e, OAv. - as in ub ‘both’, YAv.
uruuaire, duiie = Ved. duvé ‘two’. OIA “praghya”-sandhi in the du.
(cf. Pini I 1,11), -e in the -- stem (*-aH or *-aiH), - in the --
stem (*-H < *-ih2-h1), and - in the -- stem (*-H < *-uh2-h1)
is ex- plained by the effect of the laryngeal, cf. FORSSMAN MSS 25
(1969) 49 n.11; cf. above n.10. 28) YAv. vavhi < *as ‘good’,
YAv. aši (possibly aši) = Ved. ak ‘(both) eyes’, YAv. uši = OPers.
ušy ‘(both) ears’, YAv. haxti ‘(both) thighs’, OAv. manahi-c ‘and
both kinds of thinking’, vacahi-c = Ved. vácas ‘both kinds of
speech’. 29) Gen. - < *-s in OAv. ahuu ‘of both kinds of
existence’, maiiuu, haxtii (~ Ved. sakthyòs) ‘of (both) thighs’,
YAv. pasuu ‘of cattle’, bzuu ‘of (both) arms’, amrtt ‘of both kinds
of immortality’, hauruut ‘of both kinds of completeness’, cašman
‘of both views’, aaon ‘of both righteous ones’; loc. - < *-a in
OAv. ahuu ‘in both kinds
1. nouns
13
in the plural, nom. voc. m. f. -as < *-as30) < *-es, acc. m.
f. -as/-n(s)31) < *-as/*-ns <*-s32)/*-ns (< **-ms), nom.
acc. n. -i, -Ø (with or without lengthening of preceding vowel)
< *-h2 (collective),33) instr. -bhis < *-bhiš34) <
*-bhi(-s), dat. abl. -bhyas < *-bhas35) < *-bhos/*-bhos/*-mos
(see n.21), gen. -m, -aam, -nm, -naam < *-m, -aam, -nm, -naam36)
< *-om, *-oom,
of existence’. YAv. uruuaraii (uruuar- ‘plant’) is attested both in
the loc. and gen. Cf. n.13–15. 30) > Av. -, OPers. -a. 31) -ns
in the sandhi-form, e.g. - ca. Cf. n.17, n.76, n.91. 32) Hitt. -us
suggests that *-s had not been assimilated to *-s. 33) In Iranian:
1) with lengthening of the suffix-vowel: - (OAv. pour, voh = Ved.
pur ‘many’, vás ‘good’ HO[FFMANN–]FO[RSSMAN] 131, Ved. knows also
the type mádh and secondary mádhni ‘honey, mead’, later also
‘sweet’), - (YAv. zaraθuštri ‘Zoro- astrian’, cf. Ved. úc, HOFO
135, Ved. also type bhr and bhrni ‘much’); –– 2) with long
suffix-syllable going back to the PIE long-grade in the collective
formation: *-mn (OAv. an-afšmm ‘benefits’, dmn, dmm ‘territories,
creatures’, nmm ‘names’, vardmm ‘aids’, hax mm ‘followers’, YAv.
dunmm ‘clouds’, HOFO 144), *-nt (OAv. mdauun ‘having reward’, HOFO
150), -r (OAv. aiir ‘days’, saxvr ‘achievements’ , HOFO 153), *-n
(YAv. aiin ‘days’, uruθβn, uruθβm-ca ‘entrails’, HOFO 153), *-s
(OAv. YAv. man ‘thinking, minds’, YAv. mans-ca, OAv. YAv. raoc,
OAv. raocs-c ‘lights’, YAv. vahs-ca ‘better ones’, HOFO 155); –– 3)
with no markers *-ant (OAv. riθβn? ‘joining in’, HOFO 150), -iš
(YAv. xv.barziš ‘being one’s own cushion’, xv.stairiš ‘being one’s
own lair, bed’, HOFO 157), cf. Ved. drgharút ‘to be heard at a long
distance’ (VII 61,2, VIII 25,17, cf. SCARLATA 555); –– 4) with -i,
added to forms of type 2): Av. afšmn ‘shortcomings’, YAv. cinmni
‘desires’ (HOFO144); OAv. varc.h-c ‘abilities’ (HOFO 155); added to
forms with the full-grade suffix: YAv. bauuani ‘tens of thousands’,
OAv. sxvn ‘instructions’ (HOFO 153), as well as YAv. ast-i (HOFO
140). No form is attested in OPers., on tauman ‘powers’ cf. HOFO
144: dual. In Ved., in addition to madh/mádhu/mádhni etc.,
bhr/bhri/bhrni etc., and drgha- rút: snti (participle of as ‘be’),
mahnti ‘great’, ghtávnti ‘equipped with butter-oil’, pau- mnti
‘having cattle’; aki ‘eyes’, áhni ‘days’, etc. beside áh, r
‘heads’, kármi/ kárm/kárma ‘deeds’ etc., dhánvni/dhánuva ‘steppes’,
párvi/párva ‘joints’ (párv AV), bhánti ‘high’ (AV), etc.; with a
secondary nasal arci ‘flames’, yi ‘lives’, vácsi ‘words’ etc., and
návysi ‘newer’. Cf. p. 41f. [Cf. KUIPER Shortening (1955).] 34) Av.
-bš, OPers. -biš. 35) Av. -bii. Cf. n.21. 36) The distribution -m,
-aam after consonants, and -nm, -naam after sonants (“vowel
1.1.2. athematic endings
loc. -su < *-su37) < *-su.
1.1.3. notes on the locative singular There is a variety of forms
in the locative singular in Indo-Iranian athematic inflexions. In
the case of stems without ablaut, -i is simply added in general (in
Iranian, the form is not seldom unified with postposition ), e.g.,
the -t- stem, OAv. amrt it ‘in immortality’, Ved. uparátti ‘in
superiority’, ‹with -› YAv. uštat itiia ‘in desire’; the *-as-
stem, YAv. manahi = Ved. mánasi ‘in thinking’ OAv. yh, YAv. yhi ‘in
request’, OAv. srauuah = Ved. rávasi ‘in fame’, ‹with -› OPers.
drayahy ‘in a lake’; the *-iš- stem, YAv. vθiši ‘in trial’, Ved.
barhíi ‘on ritual grass’; the radical -r- stem, ‹+ -i› OAv. sair,
YAv. sairi ‘in union’, Ved. dhurí ‘on a yoke-saddle’, purí ‘in a
palisade’; the radical *-- stem, YAv. vsi = Ved. vií, ‹with -› YAv.
vsiia, OPers. viθiy ‘in a settlement’. Otherwise, see the
ablaut-scheme in the following overview: (1) Suffix in the long
grade: the -u- stem38), PII *-, OAv. YAv. vahu = Ved. vásau, OAv.
+xratu (×-), +prtu (×-) ‘at a ford’, Ved. krátau ‘in mental power’,
sánitau ‘in acquisition’, snau ‘on a summit, back’, (radical)
mitá-drau ‘in running solidly(?)’; –– the -i- stem, PII *- < PIE
*-(), OAv. grzd ‘in a step’, YAv. gara, Ved. giráu (- + of
secondary origin) ‘in a mountain’, úc, úcau ‘in purely bright ...’.
(2) Long grade in the stem: the radical m- stem, OAv. dm, ‹+ -i›
dmi ‘in a house’; the radical - stem ‹+ -i› OAv. -di (with
disyllabic i) ‘at the endow- ment(?)’ Y 33,11 < *H-i (also
possible: < *aH-a, or *aH-i with analogic , so HOFFMANN–FORSSMAN
124). (3) Suffix in the full grade (mostly PIE *-e-): the -u-
stem38), OAv. prt ‘at a ford’, YAv. ahuu ‘in existence’, dah, dahuu
(< *daha) ‘in a land’, vašt ‘in desire’, št ‘in peace’, hat ‘on
a bridge’, ht ‘in gain’, OPers. Mar- gauv, ‹with -› YAv. ahauua
(< *aha-), dahauua, OPers. dahyauv, ‹+ -i› Ved. dásyavi ‘in the
Dasyu, enemy’, snavi ‘on a summit, back’; –– the -an-,
stems”) has originated in PII, cf. also n.22. The question as to
whether the disyllabic end- ing in PIE should be interpreted as a
replacement by the thematic termination, or there was a special
disyllabic ending, is still open. 37) OAv. -h, YAv. -hu, and its
ruki-variant -š, -šu. Unified with postposition - in YAv. gaθhuua
‘among living beings’, barθrišuua ‘among mothers’, pasuš.huua (<
*pasu- šu-) ‘among cattle’, +varšuua ‘in citadels’, dmahuua ‘among
creatures’, uruθβ.huua ‘in entrails’, raochuua ‘in lights’, ušahuua
‘at dawns’, and OPers. maškuv ‘in skins’, aniyuv ‘among the
others’, dahyušuv ‘in lands, provinces’. 38) The loc. sg. forms
attested in the manuscripts of some Av. -u- stems are collected in
SKJÆRVØ Gs. MacKenzie (2005) 197ff.
1. nouns
15
-man-, -an- stem, ‹± -i› Ved. rjan(i), (to the zero-grade stem:
rjñi etc. B+) ‘in, at a king’; OAv. nmn ‘on breath’, cašmain ‘in
sight’, Ved. ()tmán(i), ‘in one’s self’, áman(i) ‘on a rock’, (zero
grade: lómni ‘in hair’ etc. AV+); ádhvan(i) ‘in a way’, ‹with -›
YAv. +aauuaniia ‘righteous’ (~ Ved. tvani); the -ant-, -ant- stem,
‹+ -i› YAv. astuuaiti ‘having bone’, ‹with -› YAv. brzaitiia, (in
Ved., to the zero-grade stem bhatí ‘high’, also in -mant- stems,
e.g. gó-mati ‘having cattle’); –– the -ar- stem ‹+ -i› YAv. nairi =
Ved. nári ‘in a man’ (zero grade: f. usrí, also usram ‘at dawn’;
nánndari ‘in a husband’s sister’); –– the -tar- stem ‹+ -i› Ved.
pitári ‘at a father’, netári ‘in a leader’, kartár sác ‘with a
maker’, hótari ‘in a Hotar-priest’; –– the -r-/-n- stem, ‹± -i›
Ved. áhan(i) ‘on a day’, súvàr ‘in sun’s light’, (zero grade: YAv.
asni ‘on a day’); –– the -yas- (-ys-) stem ‹+ -i› Ved. sáhyasi
‘stronger’; the -a-, -a- stem, ‹+ -i› Ved. gávi ‘in a cow’, dyávi
(zero grade: diví, very frequent) ‘in heaven’; –– the “radical” -p-
stem ‹+ -i› OPers. api, ‹with -› OPers. apiy ‘in water’ (zero-grade
formation in YAv. khrpiia ‘on a body’); furthermore Ved. pad-í ‘on
a foot’). (4) Suffix in zero grade (cf. also under (3)): the --
stem, Ved. tan ‘on a body’, cam ‘in a vessel’, ‹+ -i› YAv. tanuui =
Ved. tanúvì, tanúv; in Ved. secondarily with -m: uvaruvm ‘in a
mother-in-law’, tanúvm (AV); –– Ved. ‹+ -i›, the -añc- stem, prci
(m.) ‘eastward’; the -ant- stem, á-sati (satí AV+) ‘not being’; the
-vant- stem, árvati ‘in a race-horse’; the -ma()s- stem, pusí ‘in a
man’; –– the -- stem, not attested in Iran., (vk- type) Ved. gaur
‘in a she- Gaura-buffalo’ RV IX 12,3, saras ‘in a pond, lake’, nad
‘in a river’, (in the dev- type + -m: rtrym ‘in the night’,
ásikniym ‘in the dark’, araynym ‘in, at Arayn, genius of the
wilderness’, deviym ‘in, at a goddess’); –– zero-grade form ‹+ -i›
in the radical -h- stem anaúhi (AV) ‘in a draught-ox’. (5) From the
stem in various grades: full grade ‹+ -i› YAv. zmi ~ Ved. kámi ‘on
the earth’; zero grade + PIE *-a (cf. Grk. χαμα) YAv. zm, ‹unified
with -› Ved. jmay-; probably + *-en (cf. p. 34), to the *-o-
full-grade stem km-an, km-an-i, to the zero-grade jm-án; + -er/-
YAv. +zamar; cf. p.18f.
1.2. stem formations39) and ablaut The -a- stems from PIE *-e/o-
stems show no ablaut other than the “abtönung” of the PIE thematic
vowel itself. On their inflexion, cf. 1.1.1.: p. 9ff. Also the --
stems (substantives and feminine forms of the thematic adjectives)
have no ablaut, showing always a full grade in the suffix, thus
already the PIE *-eh2- stems (or “mesodynamic”, if one wants to
speak of the ablaut-scheme); but there are case forms not directly
inherited (→ 1.2.2.: p. 20f.).
39) Cf. LINDNER Altindische Nominalbildung (1878), AiG II-2
(1954).
1.1.3. loc. sg.; 1.2. stem formations and ablaut
16
Ablaut is observed in stems in -ánt-/-at-, -vánt-/-vat-,
-mánt-/-mat-, -vs-/ -vás-/-ú-, -án-/-n-/-a-, -ván-/-va-/-un-,
-mán-/-mn-/-ma-, -añc-/-ac-(/-c-), -tár-/ -tr-/-t-, -ár-/-r-/--,
root nouns, some nouns originating in elemental vocabulary (‘dog’,
‘cow’, ‘mouse’, etc.), and partially nouns in -ay-/-i-, -av-/-u-,
-y-/--, etc. The nom. voc. and acc. in the singular and dual, the
nom. and voc. in the plural, and the loc. sg. are strong cases
(cases having a strong form according to the scheme cited in 0.1.)
in PIE, on which the nominal inflexions in Indo-Iranian and OIA are
based. In Indo-Iranian, neuter nouns predominantly show weak stem-
forms in the nom.-acc. in the sg. and du., but strong forms in the
nom.-acc. pl., partly with a long grade which probably came from
the collective formation. On the ablaut in the loc. sg. cf. 1.1.3.
Many stems and forms have lost totally or partially the ablaut
which is postulated for them in particular positions on theoretical
or comparative grounds.
1.2.1. The root noun40) d- f. ‘direction’ has columnar accentuation
without ablaut. The accent position moves in the case of vc- f.
‘speech, voice’ between stem (root) and ending, thus nom. vk, gen.
vc-ás (cf. Lat. ux, ucis), but the alternation of the vowel
quantity is abandoned (BRUGMANN’s law may have influenced this
partially), cf. Av. vc-/vac- (no *uc-): OAv. YAv. vxš, gen. YAv.
vac, pl. nom. vc, acc. vac. –– -hán- ‘slaying (someone, something)’
largely maintains its ablaut (partially with analogic -ha-): nom.
vtra-h ‘slaying Vtra, obstacles’ (OAv. vrθrm.j, YAv. vrθraja), acc.
vtra-háam (YAv. vrθr- janm), instr. vtra-ghn- (YAv. vrθrjana), dat.
-ghn-é (YAv. vrθraγne), gen. -ghnás (YAv. vrθraγn), pl. nom.
atru-háas ‘slaying enemies’ (YAv. vrθr- jan), instr. vtra-há-bhis:
< *-gwhn-s, *-gwhén-, *-gwhn-éh1, *-gwhn-é, *-gwhn- és,
*-gwhén-es, *-gwh-bhis. –– These developments seem rather to be
isolated cases, and not dependent on some phonological
circumstance. The root nouns with -sani-/-s- ‘conquering’
(*senh2/*sh2) in the last mem- ber of compounds show mixed
paradigms from -sáni-, -san-, -s-, -s-, -sa-. SCARLATA
Wurzelkomposita 577–586 investigates all the forms and summarizes
585f. as follows: sg. nom. -ss and -sáni-s, acc. -sm, -sam,
-sáni-m, gen. -s-ás, -san-as, dat. -s-é, pl. nom. -ss, -ssas,
instr. -sáis. The form -sáni- is introduced from acc. sg. -sáni-m
< *-senh2-m (instead of *-); gen. sg. -san-as stands for
*-sh2-és; -s- might go back to an unattested pl.-form such as
*-sbhis < *-sh2-bhis, or the nom. sg. *-snh2-s could have become
-ss with the nasal’s loss as SCARLATA proposes among other
possibilities. This phenomenon is al- 40) Cf. Jochem SCHINDLER Das
Wurzelnomen im Arischen und Griechischen, Diss. Würzburg 1972,
Salvatore SCARLATA Die Wurzelkomposita im g-Veda, Wiesbaden 1999,
cf. also KELLENS Les noms-racines de l’Avesta, Wiesbaden
1974.
1. nouns
17
ready seen in Indo-Iranian, as shown in dat. sg. pau--é, gen. sg.
pau--ás, YAv. gen. sg. fš-š-, fš-š- ‘cattle-gainer’, cf. also
KELLENS Noms-racines 106–111.
The PIE elemental vocabulary item pd-/pad- m. ‘foot’ is
particularly archa- ic: sg. nom. pt, acc. pd-am (from this a new
stem pda-; YAv. pδm), gen. pad-ás, loc. pad-í, du. nom. acc. pd-
(YAv. pδa), pl. acc. pad-ás (YAv. paδ): < *pd-s, *pód-, *ped-és
(<*ped-és?; Lat. pedis). –– p-/ap- f. ‘water’, imagin- ed as
living being(s) and used mostly in the pl., shows ablaut between p
and ap, just like pd-/pad-, or Av. vc-/vac-:41) sg. instr. ap-,
gen. abl. ap-ás, pl. nom. p-as, acc. ap-ás, instr. ad-bhís, dat.
ad-bhyás, loc. ap-sú. The zero-grade form *-h2p- is found in anp-á-
‘river basin’, dvp-á- ‘island’, etc. In Av.: sg. nom. YAv. fš, acc.
pm, apm-ca, instr. apa, ap-ca, dat. ape, apa-cit, abl. apat, gen.
p; du. nom. acc. pa; pl. nom. p, acc. OAv. YAv. ap, apas-c, (YAv.
also p), dat. YAv. aiβii, gen. apm. –– Hysterodynamic inflexion
underlies these paradigms (or amphidynamic, if one should assume
the absence of a suffix).
The monosyllabic noun dyáv- m. (f.) ‘heaven’ preserves its original
hystero- dynamic scheme: sg. nom. dyáu-s, voc. (after nom.) dyaus,
dyáus, díyàus, acc. dym, diym (secondary dív-am), instr. div-, dat.
div-é, abl. gen. div-ás, (second- ary dyó-s), loc. dyáv-i, div-;
du. nom. acc. dyv-41a); pl. nom. dyv-as, acc. dyn, dív-as. In
Iran., only YAv. gen. sg. diiaoš is attested (Yt 3,13, according to
HUMBACH KZ 81, 282f. ‘der [Brut der] Hölle’, cf. also KELLENS
Noms-racines 402); the form is identical with Ved. dyó-s (6× in the
RV :: div-ás more than 400×), but is to be judged as analogic after
gós (PII *ga-š), cf. AiG III 224. The PIE paradigm is: sg. nom.
*d-s (Grk. Zες), *di-s42), acc. *dm (Grk. Zν, Zν-α) < *dé-m
(after STANG’s law), *dim42), dat. *di-é (Grk. Corinthian Διε,
Cyprian Διε-φιλος, Mycenaean di-we /diwei/), abl. gen. *di-és/ós
(Grk. Δις), loc. *dé + -i (Lat. Ioue), *dié42) (Lat. di), (Grk. Δι,
probably < *di-i, i.e., secondary after the forms with *di- just
like Ved. div-); pl. nom.*d-es (with after sg.?), acc. *du-ns or
*di-s.
41) The alternation between pr and pur in the stem púr- f.
‘palisade, fortification’ is phonological in nature. The stem *ph1-
had no ablaut, or abandoned it (cf. Grk. πλις < *pólh1-i-s?,
with dat. [loc.] Hom. πληι < *polh1- + -i, KLINGENSCHMITT in
lectures). It appears regularly as pr before vowels and pur before
consonants (i.e., PII *pH or *pH > *prH or *plH, and according
to the constellation, *pr|HV or *prH|CV > pur or pr ,
respectively, preserving its syllabic quantity): sg. nom. pr, acc.
púr-am, instr. pur-, pl. loc. pr-ú, probably < *ph1-s, *ph1-,
*ph1-éh1, *ph1-sú. Cf. n. 147. 41a) On the du. dyáv RV IV 56,5, cf.
GOT 14th World Skt.Conf. 2009, forthcoming. 42) Disyllabic LINDEMAN
variant.
1.2.1. root nouns, monosyllabic stems
18
gáv- f. ‘cow’ maintains its acrodynamic pattern: gáu-s (< *gw-s,
OAv. YAv. guš), gm (< *gwm < *gwó-m, after STANG; OAv. YAv.
gm, YAv. secondary also gaom), gen. gós (< *gwá-s, OAv. YAv.
guš, YAv. gaoš), loc. gáv-i, pl. nom. gv-as (< *gwó-es; YAv.
gauu43)), acc. gs (OAv. YAv. g, after gm, gm).44) náv- f. ‘ship,
boat’45) goes back to *náh2-- (and perhaps also *náh2-u-) which
does not alter this shape: nom. náu-s (< *n-s < *náh2--s,
Hom. νης; proba- bly disyllabic ná-us RV V 59,2 < *náh2-u-s <
*néh2-u-s), acc. nvam (*náh2- -, Hom. να, Lat. nuem), gen. nv-ás
(*nah2--és, cf. νης), pl. nom. nv-as (*náh2--es, νες), acc. nv-as
(*náh2--s, νας), náubhis (ναφι). dvr-/dur- f. ‘door’ follows a
hysterodynamic (or amphidyn.) inflexion just like pd-/pad-, p-/ap-:
sg. nom. dvr (AV+); du. dvr-, duvr-, dvr-au; pl. nom. dvr-as (5×),
acc. durás I 193,7, dúras (many times, also in I 188,5), dvr- as I
130,3, voc. dvr-as. In YAv., acc. sg. duuarm and perhaps loc. sg.
duuar (Vd 3,29) are attested; OPers. has a thematised loc. sg.
duvaray < *d (h)uara- + . They go back to PIE *dhr, *dhér-,
*dhur-és, *dhér; *dhór-es, *dhur- s. OIA d instead of *dh is
interpreted through association with dváu ‘two’. In the case of
kám-/k-/km-/jm- f. ‘earth’, various forms are developed through
phonological change, simplification of the consonant group,
analogy, or preservation of old formations (in the loc.): sg. nom.
k-s (YAv. z), acc. k-m, kam (OAv. YAv. zm), instr. kam-, jm- (YAv.
zm), abl. km-ás, jm-ás46) (YAv. zmat, zmt, zmat-ca, zmδa), gen.
jm-ás (YAv. zm, zmas-ca)46a), loc. kám-i (YAv. zmi), km-ay-, jm-ay-
(YAv. zm, < PIE *-a, cf. Grk. χα- μα), km-an, km-an-i, jm-án;
du. km-; pl. nom. km-as (YAv. voc. z- m), acc. ks, kas IV 28,5
(YAv. zmas-ca), (gen. YAv. zmm-ca), loc. k- su.47) –– These start
from a PIE *-em- stem: sg. nom. *dhég hm (Hitt. tégan ⟨te-e- kán⟩)
→ *gðhm47a) (χθν); acc.*dhég hm (from *dhég hom-m after STANG’s
law; Hitt. just as in the nom.) → *gðhm (k-m; and from *-: kam,
χθνα),
43) With YAv. / East-Iranian phonological change *-a- > *-aa-,
cf. n. 45, n. 58. 44) Throughout with the PIE *-ó-vocalism because
of its onomatopoetic origin. 45) In YAv. in nauu-za- ‘sailor,
navigator’ = Ved. nv-já- (cf. n. 43) < *náh2-u-h2ogo-, cf. Lat.
nuigre. 46) Dissimilated in divá ca gmá ca in the abl. and gen.
46a) Also LINDEMAN variant OAv. zim, YAv. zm is attested. 47) ké in
IV 3,6 nsatyya ké (according to GRASSMANN a dat. sg. of k-) is to
be emended to +nsatiyya yaké+, cf. HOFFMANN apud SCHINDLER Diss.
(1972) 15, GOT Linguistics, Archaeology and Human Past (2009) 208.
47a) *gðh is used here as a symbol for the combination of *g h + ðh
(allomorph of þ).
1. nouns
19
and *g hm48) (zm); abl. gen. *dhg hm-és/ós (cf. Hitt. tagnas
⟨ták-na-(a-)aš⟩) > *gðhm-és/ós (kmás, cf. χθονós), and *g hm-és
( jmás, zm); instr. *dhg hm-éh1 > *gðhm-éh1 (→ kam), and *g
hm-éh1 ( jm, zm); –– loc. *dhg hém(-i) (cf. Hitt. dagn from
*-óm49)) > *gðhém-i (kámi), and *g hém-i (zmi); PIE *-a- case
(cf. p.149:4.3.) in: *gðhm-a/*g hm-a > χαμα (from the LINDEMAN
variant *gðhm- a), zm, with + > kmay, jm-ay-, *gðhom-a (reformed
after *gðhom) > Lat. hum, hom; with *-en: *gðhóm-en > km-an,
km-an-i, *g hm-én > jm-án; with *-(e)r: YAv. +zamar ‘in the
earth’ (Yt 1,29, after BARTHOLOMAE) < *g hém-er or *-; ––
Indo-Iran. pl. forms come from *gðhom-és, *gðhm-s50). The nom. sg.
Ved. k-s, YAv. z, Ved. loc. pl. k-su have been formed analogically
after the -- stems through the link of acc. sg. k-m, zm, acc. pl.
ks. The frequently attested n. nom. sg. kma or km owes its -man-
stem form to an imitation based on the loc. kman, kmani. This
vocabulary item was, as is the case in many IE languages, no longer
in use, and an epithet pthiv- ‘(the) wide one’ was (euphe-
mistically) used as a common word for ‘earth’ beside bhmi- (OAv.
bm-, YAv. bm-, OPers. bm-) from bhavi/bh ‘come into being, become’,
etc. The word pthiv- is originally the f. of the adj. pthú- ‘wide’
(cf. km ... pthvm RV X 31,9 ~ YAv. zm prθβm, prθβe ... zm-; urv
pthv ... dyvpthiv VI 70, 1.4) but has been fixed in this form and
meaning, whereas the f. adj. ‘wide’ shows the form pthv- without
vocalization of *h2. The starting point was: *pth2--íh2 > pthv
‘wide’, gen. *pth2--éh2-s > *pt (h)ivys > pthivys/pthiviys
(used in the value ‘of the earth’; oblique cases of the f. adj.
seem not to be attested).51) On nár- m. ‘man’ and stár- ‘star’, cf.
p. 32; on hárd- ‘heart’, s- n. ‘mouth’, dó- ‘forearm’, ák-i ‘eye’,
and y- n. ‘broth’, cf. p.34f.; on ván- ‘dog’, cf. p.39.
1.2.1.1. The root nouns, or the nouns to be regarded as such,
ending in - are inflected as follows: sg. nom. m. sth-s ‘standing’
(used also as n.), rathe-h-s (YAv. raθa-št); f.52) gn-s ‘god’s
wife’, (YAv. x ‘spring’); acc. sth-m, rathe-
48) All Av. forms come from simplified *g h (*gðh would have become
* in Av.). 49) Cf. MELCHERT Anatolian Historical Phonology (1994)
135. 50) *gðhm-s has become *g hm-s (YAv. zmas-ca) as a LINDEMAN
variant, or sim- plified *gðh-s (ks, kas). 51) Cf. also DUNKEL
Sprache 34 (1988–1990) 12. 52) Forms without -s in the nom. sg. f.
are to be identified as pertaining to the -- stem inflexion. A
transition happens easily through the link of PII formations such
as instr. sg. - beside -áy in the -- stems, oblique cases in the
pl. --bhis, --bhyas, --su, cf. 1.2.2.: p.20f. Forms with -- stem
inflexion increase after the RV in the abstract substantives and f.
adjectives. Cf. the discussion by SCARLATA cited in the next
footnote, and ibidem, p. 378,
1.2.1. root nouns, monosyllabic stems, root nouns ending in
20
h-m (YAv. raθa-štm), gn-m, kh-m ‘spring’; instr. (only f., and not
always certain) apa-dh ‘by removal’ II 12,3 < *-dhh1-éh1,53)
prati-dh VIII 77,4 ‘in (one) draught(?)’, abhi-khy ‘by glance,
looking-at’, etc., (OAv. -da ‘through endowment’, Y 33,12); dat.
(1) m. d-é ‘for giving’ < *dh3-é, uci-p-é ‘for the drinker of
the clear (Soma)’, (YAv. raθa-šte54)), (2) as inf. pra-khyái ‘to
see’, upa-yái ‘to travel near’, etc. < *-eh2-é(?), (YAv.
raθa-šti55)); gen. m. ki-pr- ás ‘filling boundaries’, (YAv. raθa-št
instead of -); in OAv. loc. -di (cf. p.14: (2)); du. m. ki-pr,
go-p, go-páu ‘herdsmen’; pl. nom. m. rathe-hs, (YAv. arma-št
‘standing still’), f. gns, (YAv. x); acc. m. (no certain examples
in Ved.; YAv. raθa-št, raθa-šts-ca), f. gns, js ‘children’, (YAv.
x); instr. m. agre-p--bhis ‘drinking at first’, (YAv. ak.dbiš
‘producing bad things’), f. gn-- bhis, ratna-dh--bhis
‘treasure-giving’; abl. m. bhri-d--bhyas ‘than many giving ones’;
loc. f. gn--su, j--su, (OAv. adh ‘at the oblations’ < *-dh-);
and in YAv. gen. xm, (no root-form is attested in the gen. pl. in
Ved.).
1.2.2. The -- suffix stems are the descendants of PIE *-ah2- <
*-eh2- stems with the endings presented in 1.1.2. (p.11ff.). But
there are some PII or OIA in- novations, especially the forms which
have been clarified by employing forma- tions from the dev-
inflexion (proterodynamic type) of the *-éh2-/-ih2- stems or the
like: In the sg. instr. (1) -áy: jihváy ‘with a tongue’, etc.,
(OAv. danaii, YAv. danaiia56) ‘by religious vision’; OPers. framny
‘command’ is a mixed for- mation) < PII *-á, analogically after
[*da- :: *da-i- = dhr- :: x, x = dhr-a-], or after instr. sg. táy
of the pronoun t- < *téh2- (cf. OChSlav. tojo < *ta-m,
n.170); (2) -: jihv etc. (Vedic, frequently in -y- and -t- stems;
OAv.
on pra-m-, prati-m X 130,3 and pramé IX 70,4. OAv. vavh d Y 49,1
(‘good endowment’?) is the nom. sg. of the derivative -- stem
(*-dhh1-éh2-), on the original root noun -d- cf. above p.14: (2),
cf. NARTEN Yasna Haptahiti 268. 53) sva-dh ‘by one’s own decision’
possibly in VIII 32,6; but the frequently attested sva-dháy
suggests an -- stem (*-dhh1-éh2-), or, at least, a transition to
it, cf. SCARLATA
264f. A similar remark applies also to several other - formations.
On rad-dhé I 102, 2 and rad-dh ít VII 32,14 from rad-dh--
(*red-dhh1-éh2-), as opposed to the OAv. root noun zraz-d-
‘believing, trusting’ (nom. pl. zraz-da < *aH-as, Y 31,1; YAv.
a-zraz-da- is a thematic stem), cf. ib. 263. 54) Thus presumably Vd
14,9 (2×) instead of raθišti (according to BARTHOLOMAE the loc. sg.
). –– YAv. shows also forms from the -tar- stem. 55) Always
preceding vstriii ‘for the farmer’, Yt 19,8; 13,88, Vd 5,57.58. 56)
In addition, there occurs a form with ii: xšaθr.kmiia Y 9,24
(+kmaiia?).
1. nouns
21
dan, YAv. dana) < PII *- < *-ah2-eh1; –– dat. -yai:57) manyai
‘for devotion’ etc. < PII *-, probably *-- + *- of the dev-
inflexion, (YAv.58) da- naiii59)); –– abl.60) gen. -ys: sénys
‘army’ etc. < PII *-s, probably *-- + *-s of the dev- inflexion,
(OAv. YAv. danaii [YAv. form, cf. n.58], YAv. hanaii, YAv.
hanaiis-ca, OPers. hainy ‘army’); –– loc. -ym: grvym ‘on the neck’
etc. < *-- + *-m of the dev- inflexion; PIE *-: YAv. gruuaiia
(cf. n. 58), OPers. Aθury; –– voc. (1) -e: jye ‘wife’ etc. < PII
*-a of unknown origin, (OAv. brxδ ‘estimated’, YAv. dane); (2) PII
*- in OAv. Pourucišt, YAv. sra ‘strong’; the co-existence of two
voc. forms has produced the YAv. nom. sg. prne ‘full’. Other forms
are regularly built: nom. -, -; acc. -m, -m; –– du. nom. acc. voc.
-e (cf. n. 27); abl. --bhym; gen. loc. -áyos, -ayos < PII loc.
*-aH-Ha × gen. *-aH-Hs, PII gen. *-as in YAv. uruuaraii ‘of the two
plants’ (cf. n. 58); –– pl. nom. voc. -s, -s, and the double
formation -sas, -sas (cf. n.16); acc. -s, -s; instr. --bhis,
--bhis; dat. abl. --bhyas, --bhyas; gen. -nm, -nm, also with nam
(cf. n. 22); loc. --su, --su.61)
1.2.3. The -- stem inflexion has two main types. [1] The vk-
(‘she-wolf’) type, comprising root nouns, e.g. dh- ‘thought,
reflexion’, and derivative feminines from m. -a- stems62), as well
as some m., e.g. rath- ‘charioteer’, has no ablaut in the stem:63)
sg. nom. dh-s, acc. dhíy-am, rathíy-àm, instr. dhiy-, rathíy-, dat.
dhiy-é, rathíy-, gen. dhiy-ás, ahíy-às ‘mother-cow’, loc. gaur,
saras, nad (cf. 1.1.3. (4): p.15), voc. nadi ‘river’, yami ‘Yam’;
–– du. nom. acc. abhi-ry-, -au 57) On ai for gen., abl. in the
language of the theologists cf. n.25. 58) With YAv. / East-Iranian
change *-a- > -aa-, cf. n.43. 59) Also iii in gaθiii ‘for the
living being’ Y 9,3 (+gaθaiii?), cf. GOT Akten Kraków 161 n.3. 60)
About YAv. abl. -aiit, cf. n.26. 61) kany ‘girl’ (f.) shows in the
nom. sg. -, but the stem goes back to a formation with HOFFMANN’s
possessive suffix -h3ón- (< *-h3én-)/-h3n-, cf. 1.2.10. [3]: p.
42f. 62) Cf. p. 51:[2]. Also, e.g. napt- ‘granddaughter’ (beside
AV+ naptr-, naptí-) to nápt- ‘grandson’. 63) Thus also in Av. (in
OPers., the -- stem inflexion has been partially transferred to the
-i- inflexion): e.g., sg. nom. OAv. r-j-s ‘living honestly’, YAv.
zarnanš ‘golden’, acc. OAv. raiθm ‘charioteer’ (with disyllabic -m,
i.e. a YAv. form < *raθim), YAv. yauua- jim ‘living eternally’
(< *-jim), dat. OAv. r-jiii (< *-jia), gen. Srtat.f drii
(girl’s name, ‘having a famous father’); du. nom. YAv. ratu-friia
‘pleasing the Supervisor(s)’; pl. nom. YAv. ratu-frii, acc. OAv.
yauua-jii, YAv. tištriianii, aniias-ca ‘Sirius-stars’, dat. YAv.
yauua-jibii. The endings, e.g. in the gen. sg. -ás, may point to a
hysterodyn. origin.
1.2.2. -- suffix stems; 1.2.3. -- stem inflexions